A policy written after the fact is written around the facts. This one is published now, while there is nothing to protect, so that it can be held against us later.
The international standard for certifying persons treats one arrangement as a threat to impartiality on its face: an organization that both trains candidates and decides whether they pass. It is the single most common structural failure in this industry, and it is why several energetic certification ventures never become credible.
CABCEP sits within a wider group of Canadian energy businesses, and some of those businesses deliver training and operate in the same industry. That is a relationship capable of creating a threat to impartiality, and stating it here is the first thing this policy requires of us.
What follows from it: no training business inside or outside that group receives preference of any kind; no CABCEP scheme will name, require or recommend any of their courses; the separation of certification decisions from training delivery, and of governance, personnel and revenue, must be completed and documented before any CABCEP certification is issued, not afterwards. CABCEP issues no certification today, which is the honest position while that work is done.
Requiring a course would be the fastest route to revenue in this business, and every candidate who trains elsewhere and certifies with us is revenue we forgo. That is the trade. A credential is worth having precisely to the degree that it could have been refused, and an organization that profits from preparing you for its own examination cannot credibly refuse you.
If you believe CABCEP has acted contrary to this policy — in a scheme, a decision, a communication or a commercial relationship — say so, using the form on the home page, and it goes to the impartiality committee rather than to the people complained about. We would rather hear it early and publicly than have it become true quietly.
Because every organization in this position writes a policy, and most of them write it in language designed to leave room. The test of a policy is whether it forbids the thing that would be most profitable. This one does, in numbered sentences, in public, before there is anything to lose.
No. It holds no accreditation, has no application in progress, and issues no certification. When that changes it will be stated on this site with the accrediting body and the scope named.
No, and it will not. That is rule one and it is the point of the whole policy.
It sits within a wider group of Canadian energy businesses, some of which deliver training. That is disclosed above, and the separation required before any certification is issued is set out there too.
It is being formed with balanced stakeholder representation and the call for members is open. A committee appointed entirely by the board it oversees is not one.
Related
The registry
Listing is free, verified against the issuing body, and open to practitioners certified by anyone. The registry is only worth anything if it is the whole industry.